August 28, 2005
The 94th Engineer Combat Battalion from our post is battling their second summer in Iraq
. They were the first unit to stay a full 365 days for OIF I
, and now they're back again for OIF III. I am friends with a few of 94th's wives, and I have been so impressed with their fortitude and optimism. They say that the second year is easier than the first...
Posted by: Sarah at
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.
I don't dare ever have a pity party around the wives in my bf's unit. They were in Iraq (Kuwait at first) from Feb. 2003 until Feb. 2004, and this is at least the second deployment for most. Once one of the newbie wives made some kind of complaint about missing an anniversary together, because of this deployment...and another wife said, well, yeah...this is our fifth deployment! Her hubs had been deployed to Bosnia, South America and I don't know where else, but she was an old hand at this...and oh, my goodness, only 2 years older than I am. It definitely is a comfort to hear that it gets easier, I truly believe it does. Because mid-deployment is A LOT easier than the beginning. And oh my goodness...I am like counting single digits now until I see my man...sooo exciting!
Posted by: CaliValleyGirl at August 28, 2005 06:23 PM (ZAHji)
| Add Comment
August 27, 2005
Michael Yon's account of Mosul
kept me on the edge of my seat. Mama, you gotta read this one.
Posted by: Sarah at
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.
Oh this mama read it... wow
Just hope his luck holds out.
Can't help of thinking about Steven Vincent :^(
Posted by: Pebble at August 27, 2005 07:42 PM (6mUkl)
That was amazing. Thank heaven for people like Michael Yon who know firsthand what our boys experience in Iraq and will write about it. We need to hear these stories on a constant basis to make us realize the sacrifices our young men make for us. The part about the letter from the Lamas gave me chills, and LTC Kurilla is a firstclass human being and someone I would be proud to know. Thanks for sharing.
Posted by: nancy at August 29, 2005 02:16 AM (+pnEF)
| Add Comment
August 26, 2005
We hear a lot about the Army not meeting its recruiting goals this year, but here's something
I hadn't heard yet anywhere:
The active ArmyÂ’s fiscal 2005 recruiting goal is 80,000, but Schoomaker said he and his generals are predicting that the service will be Â“a couple of thousand shortÂ” when the fiscal year ends Sept. 30.
That shortfall can be absorbed without affecting the ArmyÂ’s operations, Schoomaker said, because it only takes 72,000 new recruits to sustain the force.
Â“What this really means is that weÂ’re not building the 30,000 [increase] as fast as IÂ’d like, Schoomaker said, referring to the ArmyÂ’s ongoing effort to boost its end-strength from 480,000 to 510,000 by 2007.
So the goal is set higher than what they need. It's not good to be short, but it's not the end of the world, as some would like us to believe. Schoomaker continues:
But when it comes to judging the ArmyÂ’s health, it is the ArmyÂ’s continuing success at keeping soldiers, not bringing in new ones, that is the serviceÂ’s true Â“report card,Â” Schoomaker said.
All 10 of the active ArmyÂ’s divisions have met 100 percent or more of their retention goals, Schoomaker said, with the highest re-enlistments posted by units either in combat or freshly home from Iraq or Afghanistan.
Posted by: Sarah at
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 1 kb.
August 21, 2005
For many soldiers, this is the face of Iraq...
This is their experience and what they remember from their time in Iraq. But reader Tanker sent me a link to another face of war. It's another very real aspect of Iraq these days...
The difficulty with the war in Iraq is the differing missions. One soldier's experience could be mighty different from another's, and when both write home and tell friends and family what "war" is like, they're going to paint a very different picture. That's how my favorite reservist ended up in a conversation where someone said, "You guys just stayed in camp and took pictures, right?", when in fact over half of the soldiers in his unit saw major action and are suffering from PTSD. FOB Anaconda has a Baskin Robbins and salsa dancing night; my husband and his platoon spent 87 days living IN Iraq, outside the safe confines of an American FOB. If your daughter is lying around in a bikini in Iraq, you'll have a vastly different view on the uptempo of the war than the Marlboro Man's mom does.
Posted by: Sarah at
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.
ay-yi-yi, I am going to agree with you there. As for the female soldier thing, I agree with you. I was active duty, saw everything you are speaking about firsthand. Anyone who says otherwise is either naive or deluded. And this is coming from a dirty liberal.
Posted by: Jen at August 21, 2005 10:18 PM (GM8gh)
You are doing a good job on your blog.
I am ashamed though, that young women, who should be creating life, are being soldiers and taking life, because the United States has so many cowardly young men.
I did my time in Viet Nam when men were men.
Posted by: Greg at August 21, 2005 10:39 PM (Yvyka)
Were the men braver then, or where they just, you know, drafted?
Posted by: Pericles at August 21, 2005 11:06 PM (hHudX)
My boyfriend spent almost every night of his deployment to Iraq on an airbase, while only occasionally overnighting at an FOB, and ditto for this deployment to Afghanistan. Although he flies a lot, and that is pretty dangerous too, it certainly isn't as dangerous as doing patrols in Humvees Baghdad. I am sure I would be singing a different tune if he were in an infantry company and not an aviation one.
Posted by: CaliValleyGirl at August 22, 2005 08:26 AM (fSDNQ)
well there has always been front line soldiers and REMF'S.which will cause resentment over time.i'm not sure how we should be fighting this war at this point.while progress has been made in some areas of iraq and afghanstan alot more needs to be done politically and security wise.i mean it's simple in one respect if you're not native middle eastern you can't walk the streets not without security teams unless you want to wind up possibly getting kidnapped or killed.it's hard to build a society in that kind of atmosphere.
Posted by: tommy at August 23, 2005 10:19 AM (NMK3S)
God bless both the front-line soldiers and the rear area folks. Who's to say the bikini-clad woman didn't just complete a 15 hour day patching up a battle-damaged vehicle? I'll grant her a bit of pool time as I sit here fat, dumb, and happy with my wife and kids in beautiful 75 degree Wisconsin.
Posted by: Keith at August 24, 2005 09:30 PM (e0nDu)
| Add Comment
August 03, 2005
If you're in USAREUR like me, you didn't get to see the show Over There
. My mother-in-law relayed some of the show to me, and parts she remembered made me groan. I wish I could see it for myself, but it sounded hackneyed. My husband and I were goofing off later on: "Gosh, Sarge, what a SNAFU." and "Sir, yes, sir!" and other things that only appear to get said in the TV Army. John of Argghhh! compiled reviews from milbloggers
who watched the program, and the prognosis is not looking good. I can completely understand though: my husband can't get within ten feet of a military movie without turning beet red and swearing up a storm. If we want to see a show about war, we opt for War Is The H-Word
And I hear there was a soldier openly smoking pot? HA. Double HA.
Posted by: Sarah at
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.
For your information, there's not any agencies like DEA in Iraq, and the police dogs are often dipatched to sniff out bombs, not drugs. Yes, lots of soldiers have found and smoked hash out there, if you think that drug tests are rampant out there in the field, triple ha's to you then.
Posted by: nerdstar at August 03, 2005 04:40 PM (AkKlL)
I think the key word in her post was 'openly', as in OPENLY smoking pot. That means, in front of everyone, like it's okay. Now, if your little buds smoked behind a building or in a hooch and dropped the joint and stepped on it when someone walked in - that would not be OPENLY. OPENLY would be smoking in front of the Brigade Commander and moving the stub to salute. Because it's okay, everybody's doing it. Get it now?
Why don't you repost and, since something has destroyed your brain cells, I'll even let you win on the triple HA. I'm not sure you can count to double digits if you don't get OPENLY in a sentence. Poor child.
Posted by: Oda Mae at August 03, 2005 05:16 PM (uep0B)
I'm with your Hubby, red faced.
Posted by: Ken Dixon at August 04, 2005 02:01 AM (6coDp)
Being a physician, I used to be unable to watch "ER" because of the inaccuracies. Drove me nuts, and I drove my husband nuts talking over the show the whole time, trying to explain how this, that and the other thing were wrong. However, it was still a great show and very entertaining. My grandfather, my uncle and two of my cousins were/are NYPD, and although they would turn "beet red" when my mom and I watched NYPD Blue...we still loved it. I'm sure that "Over There" is nearly impossible for true military to stomach - but hey, if it's entertaining, and most of all, if it reminds people back here in the comfort of home, what our military does for us...then I'm all for it.
Posted by: gibby at August 04, 2005 11:53 AM (DrMqI)
I smell a rat, and assessing from the fact that you've way overreacted about this, I think that rat is you...enjoy the smoke! I'm merely trying to make a point that illegal drug use does go on while in deployment. I can't have any say in how Steve Bochco writes in that "Over There" series, he's the one who's got to face up to the factualness of his script writing. Yet it seems like folks like you simply uses this forum to spew venom, and such medium has obviously been a waste for the likes of you. Lastly, I was there in Iraq for a year, and I am not going to let you or the likes of you discount that experience.
Posted by: nerdstar at August 04, 2005 04:05 PM (AkKlL)
My husband was drug tested in Iraq. I don't know if that's standard, but he was. And he put a soldier in jail for drinking, so that kind of stuff was no joke in his Company.
Posted by: Sarah at August 04, 2005 04:36 PM (NxuHd)
| Add Comment
August 01, 2005
Man, this is why I've avoided blogging lately; it seems everything I say gets taken out of context or misconstrued. I get tired of going in circles.
So...I'm also not saying that all females are evil and unable to handle the military. I sure wish people wouldn't extrapolate my post into something I haven't argued.
My big beef is the view our society has that everything is the man's fault. This happens with sexual harrassment and infidelity, both in and outside the Army, but it happens in other realms too, which I've blogged about before in reference to Kim du Toit's bullseye, The Pussification of the Western Male.
Think about sitcoms: the men always cause the trouble. The portrayal of men on TV is ghastly. I saw it again today on a rerun of King of Queens: she wanted to go to the opera and he didn't; apparently she's too big of a witch to accept "look, hon, that's not really my bag", so he had to concoct this elaborate scheme to get out of going where he looked like a jerk in the end. I'm telling you, I stopped watching Everybody Loves Raymond when Ray ripped up his Superbowl tickets just to get Debra to stop whining for a second. The women on these shows are atrocious, but the joke is always on the dumb/incompetent/insensitive man.
Newsflash: men are not to blame for everything. That's my overarching beef with sexual harrassment norms and my reason for challenging Smink's post. Sometimes women are to blame for the unwanted advances and failed marriages.
Posted by: Sarah at
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 266 words, total size 2 kb.
Truth always hurts, but still it must be said. Thanks for saying what many people know. Maybe some don't, but I think they are just in denial. People smart enough to read must be honest enough to admit the truth.
Posted by: Ruth H at August 01, 2005 10:55 AM (7br1D)
To put the sitcom example in perspective, in the last season of Everybody Loves Raymond Ray Romano made $800,000 per episode. Patricia Heaton, who played his wife, was apparently making $75,000-$90,000. So, yeah, the "Men are stupid and women are wise" bit is mined for comedy, and maybe mined too much. That doesn't mean that it reflects the way that our society really values men and women, though.
Posted by: Pericles at August 01, 2005 05:22 PM (hHudX)
Say it loud, dear. You have more allies than you know.
"If it weren't for men, women would still be living in caves." -- Camille Paglia.
Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at August 01, 2005 06:57 PM (MzH7h)
So, I take a little time away from "The Sphere" and this is what I come back to-- my friends having to clarify their statements because other people don't like what they have to say? No, screw that. You say what you think, dimwits be damned.
People donÂ’t usually want clarification anyway, even if they say they do. For the most part all they want to do is twist words and play stupid little games so they can try and kick your words back in your face. Say what you think and let it be. If others want to be childish, then let it be so.
And one more thing, the last time I checked, women were the equals of men in American society. With equal rights come equal responsibilities. Both sexes are at fault for the problems in American society, not just one. DonÂ’t like that statement? Kiss me arse! No clarification needed... OUT!
Posted by: Ken Dixon at August 02, 2005 12:01 AM (+SdnQ)
Never explain...never complain.
If the 'sheeple' out there really didn't understand, they could ask for a clarification. But instead they choose to accuse you of saying things you never said.
Thank you for being there to tell us what you think!
Posted by: Brad at August 02, 2005 01:46 AM (Qz3ul)
Don't sweat the negative feedback. I think your points are well made. My own observations and thoughts are similar. Back when I was a young LT in Germany an old crusty First Sergeant gave me some sage advice about the same subject which I will clean up in this forum:" never ____ the hired help" and nothing will come back and haunt you. That meant to me, I always had to maintain the highest standards of behavior around the troops, all of the troops, and expect nothing less of your leaders and the troops. When that is violated use a big hammer.
As for getting flak from some of the troops out there, female or otherwise, it is my opinion that they either have an agenda themselves or they over reacted to the stimulus. And there are some out there that just don't like testosterone... been there and seen it up close. Now if this doesn't get a reaction like a red star cluster in a wall locker nothing will. All the best to you and the Hubby on his B-Day.
Posted by: GreyEagleO6 at August 02, 2005 12:25 PM (WiKxR)
Great support group you have.. that should make you feel better.
Let it be known though.. that people are entitled to their opinions and when you write your stuff on a public blog.. well.. You're gonna get some differing views now and again.
If you felt that you had to defend your position and this was bothersome to you.. then perhaps you should just not defend it.. and ignore people who don't agree with you. There's no faster way to diffuse a disagreement.. then to not pay attention to it.
With that being said.. I wish you the best of luck with your blog. It appears that you have a great network of readers who will go so far as to down other's opinions to uplift yours. It's human nature.
I'll have them all know though.. that Grey Eagle is in fact an amazing woman. An amazing person.. and if she did get offended.. she had a right to. It is a matter of opinion.. Some of your statements were pretty harsh and generalized.. and it was easy to feel a little prickle. But that doesn't make her a bad person, or wrong.. and the same could be said for anyone else that disagrees with you. Not that you said either of those things.
Take care.. and like your friends said.. write what you will at your own risk. People who don't agree with you.. will read.. comment and then move on to other blogs where they feel like their views are welcome.. not opposed.
It's the nature of such things! Is it not?
And with such bold statements as your own.. and strong opinions (both not bad things) you will face much heavier criticism in the future. Be prepared.. and be strong.
Unless of course, Big Brother tells you to knock it off.. then go to plan B.
Take care and best of luck to you all.
Posted by: Army Girl at August 02, 2005 10:25 PM (puF94)
"With that being said.. I wish you the best of luck with your blog. It appears that you have a great network of readers who will go so far as to down other's opinions to uplift yours. It's human nature."
I wanted to add to this.. that putting other opinions down is normal if it doesn't agree with you.. Personal attacks and name calling is what I was more referring to.
Sorry about that.
Posted by: Army Girl at August 02, 2005 10:28 PM (puF94)
| Add Comment
I thought I was perfectly clear in my post on women in the military
that I was only bringing up additional issues on the topic. But it appears that I need to say more.
I am not in any way saying that all of the blame lies with females. The reason I wrote the post was because Smink's post only addressed the issues that women face; I wanted to point out that there's another side to the story that neither Smink nor his 15 commenters addressed. That doesn't mean that I think females are the military's sexual predators.
Men can be sneaky, nasty jerks. I know of plenty of stories of the gross and immoral things they've done downrange too. However, we can't lay all of the blame at their feet. Women can be conniving sluts too. As a society, I believe we're too quick to always blame the men.
One scenario fleshed out: I heard a soldier tell the story of a time he heard a female specialist completely sass-mouth her first sergeant. She interrupted him and was extremely rude. As she left, my soldier friend expressed shock that she could get away with being so impertinent; he was told that the first sergeant had made the enormous error of having consentual sex with this female and was now paying for his mistake. This female specialist threatened to expose him if he didn't give her special treatment. Was the 1SG wrong for sleeping with her? You bet your sweet bippy he was! But this female is now the one hurting mission readiness by blackmailing her NCO. She could turn him in and say she was raped, and there's nothing he could do about it. In today's world and military, women hold all of the power when it comes to sexual harrassment. And I truly believe that some of them abuse this system.
Men and women are having sex downrange. Some of them are married, some are not. But what happens when two unmarried soldiers are having sex and the man wants to end it, and the female gets mad and reports to the unit that he raped her? Happened to someone I know. We as a society tend to always believe the woman is telling the truth in these situations; I personally don't believe that anymore. I think the system is abused and broken, so I get irritated when we moan about the plight of the poor, harrassed women in the military, and when every other AFN commercial is about stopping sexual harrassment against women. Some of these women know exactly what they're doing and have ruined the system for those who really are being harrassed.
[P.S. I also know that infidelity is not only a product of deployment or the military. Our last president had consentual sex with an intern. Bonehead, stupid, ridiculous move on his part. But what happened? She hung on to a dirty dress and destroyed his reputation, while she got book deals and made money. I don't excuse the president, but I do think that's despicable behavior on her part as well. She was not a victim in that situation, but she retained victim status simply because she is a woman. I believe the problem extends to all of our society.]
Posted by: Sarah at
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 449 words, total size 3 kb.
You hit the nail on the head when you said they system is broken. It needs to be fixed. I think many people just have a hard time believing that women would act this way.
Posted by: Mare at August 01, 2005 09:06 AM (0CpxG)
I am a married soldier, 35 years old, and a combat medic with the 101st Airborne Division preparing to deploy again to Iraq in the next few weeks with a Forward Combat Support Battalion
Your insecure statements are exactly what is wrong with the system. Case in point, there are 200 soldiers in my Company, a third of us are women. Of that there is one female soldier that we consider a "slut". Based on your statement all the rest of us who work so hard to earn the respect of the male soldiers should be held to her standard and are being deployed to entertain the male soldiers.
"But this female is now the one hurting mission readiness by blackmailing her NCO. She could turn him in and say she was raped, and there's nothing he could do about it" This statement very rarely could happen. If anything, the fact that the 1st Sgt allows his affair to carry over into the misson hurts the mission and probably shouldn't be a 1st Sgt.
A female soldier having sex with a 1st Sgt. Yep it happens. But, I can almost promise you that the 1st Sgt approached her with offers. That is simply the way it works. Does she have "ALL THE POWER", not in the real Army. The reason she gets away with the attitude is because the 1st Sgt doesn't want to risk losing what he has on the side. His weakness. She can report it was rape, but in 8 outof 10 cases the results will be the same, "there are not enough facts to further the investigation". See in the real Army it is a 1st Sgt's word against hers, and just like sexual harrassment, if there are not several witnesses (who have to be impartial, not friends of hers) then the commander investigating the case will not risk losing a senior NCO. Again, that is just the way it is.
In truth, fact, and reality, the only "power" we have is that the male soldiers hope and pray that we might consider sex with them, and that is the true "power". Most of us don't even consider it, it is just in the male nature to behave this way to us. The only male soldier who really has to worry, is the one that has a history of sexual harrassment or other issues that the commander is aware of and usually goes home and tell his spouse another story.
I'm not saying that as female soldiers we don't take crap from the men, or that we don't don't dish it out in turn. But the bottom line, is that we are soldiers with a very dangerous job to do. That is our first concern and priority. We really don't have the time to get upset over a comment or two. You probably don't understand this. The reason is, males talk and associate with each other in a swaggering sexual context, that is just their nature, esspecially in the Army where testesrone runs high. So this is their way of telling us that we are considered one of them, we are one of the guys, a soldier, an equal. So as long as you don't sexual touch us, or proposition us, it really doesn't bother us.
Sorry if this blows your image of us, but this is the facts and the way it is in the real Army.
Posted by: Grey Eagle at August 01, 2005 09:53 AM (bTUq5)
I don't understand what you mean by this "blowing my image of you." I'm glad there are females like you in the Army. I don't WANT to think that they're all skeezy. I want males and females to work on equal footing. But I'm telling you that every commercial break here in Germany contains some female complaining about being sexually harrassed. My husband had to attend repeated sexual harrassment training even when he worked in a combat unit with zero females. The Army focuses so hard on it that it seems that this is the only issue surrounding female soldiers. I'm glad to hear you say that you and your fellow females see the situation differently; please don't put words into my mouth that I didn't say. I'm not rooting for your failure...
Posted by: Sarah at August 01, 2005 10:03 AM (qPy3t)
"But, I can almost promise you that the 1st Sgt approached her with offers. "
Must be different in the USAF then. Seen it happen, though the young lady didn't do anything out of sorts afterwards. Just a trophy hunter.
Oh, and Sarah, you were quite clear in your previous post. I probably won't comment because it brings back some memories of things that happened to a couple of airmen (not me) that I was unfortunate enough to have been around during the early 90's. I agree that such incidents should be part of the debate, along with other factors.
I think the biggest problem that people will have with this topic is that it isn't one in which feel good measures and "good guy" politics should ever have a place. To have the best military requires that a horrifically pragmatic view be taken. Otherwise it becomes a less than optimum force. Seen that too (in the physical ability topic) though that was more prevelant than the hinky fooling around.
Somebody needed to tell these people that you don't date people at work, even if that work is a foxhole. Hell, that ought to be a law.
It's always been a law for me. Enforcable by death now that I'm married.
Heck, looks like I did comment. Dang.
Posted by: Kalroy at August 01, 2005 10:13 AM (9RG5y)
Kal, you're right. I have a problem with unmarried soldiers developing relationships downrange too, because it detracts from the mission.
And I don't even want to go into the issues surrounding physical ability. I swore off that topic when I read the astounding book The Kinder, Gentler Military
. I can't even go there. Suffice it to say that when a female hands her weapon to the NCO and whines, "SGT X, my thingy isn't working...", there are issues beyond which I want to tackle here.
Posted by: Sarah at August 01, 2005 10:36 AM (qPy3t)
I think you're quite right, Sarah.
Gray Eagle-- I think you're taking personally what's aimed at those females that give you and I a bad name.
Posted by: Sailorette at August 01, 2005 07:27 PM (goEPa)
I was directed here by my friend and fellow blogger, Grey Eagle.
Interesting discussion, to say the least.
I do understand the points I think the both of you are trying to make. My opinion though, is that yes, what you are talking about does happen.. but to a MUCH lesser degree than the norm... which is women being sexually harrassed by men in uniform. I think it's funny Grey Eagle referred me to this subject because ironically, I have felt first hand, some severe cases of this.
And I had to remove my story from my blog because it does not sit well with the guys with the big rank.
Anyway, yes.. I will agree that there are a great deal of women in the military.. younger girls, who find the attention and the newfound power to be mind blowing. But I agree with Eagle in that there are few of those girls out there.. who make the rest of us look bad. And when we start to focus so much of our attention on the very small minority, it is easy to assume and stereotype other females into their same category.
I think what is offensive is that most of us fight that 'slut' stereotype on a daily basis. Damn.. several times a day.. without having done A SINGLE THING that would warrant such derogatory remarks or rumors. But because we are female.. and greatly outnumbered, it is a part of being in the army.
When people start making generalizations and touting the negativity.. it's almost like promoting it. Whereas instead of focusing your thoughts and energy to the women out there who ARE doing right by themselves, their fellow soldiers and their service.. unknowing people begin to start making assumptions about the rest of us.
Yes.. you may not have been talking about all of the females.. but your words could and most assuredly will affect the perceptions of the people who read your blog.
I believe that you weren't trying to slander us all. And I believe that Grey Eagle is doing right by trying to offer a different perspective. The main point is that the Army focuses its money and its messages in where it thinks it needs to be. Domestic violence, child abuse and sexual harrassment/assault are prevalent... as I'm sure you know. So naturally that is where the money goes.
And being a family member of a high ranking CID agent.. I can tell you that you don't even know the HALF of what goes on on a day to day basis at our posts around the globe. But I can assure you.. that the 'atrocities' that women are creating and initiating are far few and far between what is happening TO women.. not just our soldiers.. but dependents as well.
Men are just as manipulative, just as demeaning and conniving as women. Don't kid yourself. And we could sit here for days and trade stories, I'm sure.. but in the end all that really matters is that there are stupid people out there.. and in every situation there is a shared responsibility by all involved.. except of course in random acts of violence.
Which, I'm pretty sure if you pulled those stats, you'd find very few males victimized by women.
I'm glad you clarified your earlier post.. and defended your position.. It appears to me that you are intelligent and can see both sides of this as well. I hope my comment doesn't come off as me trying to debate or argue. I support your statement as well.. just trying to explain how statements like that.. although well intentioned or not intended to make all of us Army girls look bad.. really does. It's hard not to take offense by strangers on the outside when we fight it all day long by men on the inside.
We could use a few more allies on all sides.. but no matter. We knew what we were getting into when we joined up.. and I wouldn't trade my world for anyone else's. I love my life, my career and my country.. and no matter what anyone wants to say or to call me.. or to speculate about.. I'm still going to do the best damn job I can.
Also.. you have to take into consideration that we're a bit older than these girls fresh out of high school..
But that's not to say that they are all bad!!
Have a great week.. I've GOT to get to bed.
Posted by: Army Girl at August 01, 2005 10:19 PM (puF94)
Oh yeah.. And you're damn right we hold all the power.. but not relating to sexual harrassment alone.
The problem is that it's women who are insecure who are playing these head games with people's lives and careers... and their own hearts.
If they truly knew how much power they had.. I'm sure they'd not feel the need to search for vindication, acceptance, status and other such things from others. They'd see it in themselves.
That's what's really wrong with these girls and guys.. insecurity. (ok.. well.. it's a major thing.. but certainly not the only thing.)
Posted by: Army Girl at August 01, 2005 10:25 PM (puF94)
Army Girl, my only quibble with your comment is where you call me a "stranger on the outside." I'm not *totally* on the outside. My husband just moved from Armor to Finance, so we're getting a taste of both worlds.
Posted by: Sarah at August 02, 2005 02:37 AM (IKNDq)
Good discussion on all sides I think. Main message seems to be - Don't let the jerks color your impression of an entire group - for either side. We seem to have a great military - with some real assholes thrown in - both male and female.
A lot of issues in the military are the same as issues in any large corporation. They just get magnifeid, especially in a combat situation (my opinion)
Good points made by all.
Posted by: RC at August 02, 2005 12:13 PM (gDEwS)
I knew you were a wife.. when I said, 'on the outside' I meant that. Sorry if it came off too strong.
But there is SUCH a big difference between 40+ hours a week with 'the guys' than hearing it second hand from your hubby and other people. It's just not the same when you're in it all day long..
Actually.. in my personal experience, the wives are worse than the men.. and can be way meaner!
But.. that is just my experience. I wouldn't blame them.. as they know I'm deploying with their men for a year or so.. and as it is.. I see them more than they do most of the time anyway.
Military wives, by no means.. have it easy. It's a life, job and career all its own. So is being a brat.. lol. I was born and bred Army. So I know how it is on all three sides.
Posted by: Army Girl at August 02, 2005 10:35 PM (puF94)
| Add Comment
82kb generated in CPU 0.0177, elapsed 0.0879 seconds.
52 queries taking 0.0762 seconds, 208 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.